Can Saints afford to wait until later for a QB? (merged) (5 Viewers)

[IceHot]

Which would bolster the case for higher being better. Hell, Montana had 4 and he’s a 3rd rounder, him and. Bradshaw negates Brady at the opposite end. Perhaps a way to equalize it in a directional sense.

I’m not attempting to cherry pick anything. See above.

As for excluding Brady: a strong case could be made because it’s so extreme. Teams could go on picking a QB in the 6th round for years/decades and how likely is it to happen? As likely as Kate Upton showing up at my house this Saturday for a date.

In other words not likely.

But again, if we remove Bradshaw, Brady and Montana as outliers we get a little closer. If for no other reason than winning four or more SBs is statistically a tough task to accomplish.

I suppose the best way would be to see what the next 5 year increment brings. I’m generally in agreement that limiting it to the SBs is good if for no other reason than consistency.

ETA: there is also Aikman at 3 SB wins, forgot about that.

ETA: Mahomes at 3 SB wins too.

We are pretty much on the same page...but for the record the reason its cherry picking is threefold.

1) The way you have framed the argument there is no possibility of an outlier on the other side of the equation.

2) Brady is NOT a Unique case of a late round QB being incredible....Warner was undrafted, Bart Starr won 2 SBs at pick #200. Staubach one a Superbowl at pick #122. Unitas was picked at 102, Blanda at 119.

3) The whole point of the opposite argument is that you can win 1 or many SBs with outliers in late rounds. If Bradshaw counts 4 times for 1st rounders then Brady counts 7 times for outliers.


Also we arent picking in the Top 5, which is where almost all of the SB titles from 1st Rounders are coming from. So even the base argument is Cherry Picking when it fails to begin with pick #9.

That being said if we see a quality 1st Round QB and we take him sounds awesome to me... But there is 0 reason to take an average QB over a HoF OG if that is our option. Position should barely be factored in.

Failing to pick an elite talent is what wastes a 1st rnd pick not failing to pick a QB or a position of most need.

 

[dpwga]

Why are you counting QBs who are not playing with the team that originally drafted them?
You counting Stafford? He wasn't drafted by the Rams.
You counting Goff? He wasn't drafted by the Lions.
You counting Darnold? He wasn't drafted by the Vikings.
You counting Mayfield? He wasn't drafted by the Bucs.
You counting Fields? He wasn't drafted by the Jets.
You counting Watson? He wasn't drafted by the Browns.

There's also the fact that 9 of those 24 were picked just within the last 2 drafts, so they are going to play regardless.

I'm merely counting QB's who are starting (regardless of what team drafted them). Overwhelmingly, if you are a 1st round draft pick, your chances of being a starting QB in the NFL goes way up. It was just an observation.

Doesn't matter if they have changed teams
Doesn't matter if you think they are good or not
Doesn't matter if they are newly minted starter
It was just an observation...

 

[Bayouboy]

I'm not high on this entire QB class, but if you don't have a franchise QB, you got no shot. Maybe we get lucky. All I know is rolling out with Carr and no real chance at any legit success is not how you get a fan base excited. Saints are dead. Go make a splash.

 

[Ghost]

We are pretty much on the same page...but for the record the reason its cherry picking is threefold.

1) The way you have framed the argument there is no possibility of an outlier on the other side of the equation.

2) Brady is NOT a Unique case of a late round QB being incredible....Warner was undrafted, Bart Starr won 2 SBs at pick #200. Staubach one a Superbowl at pick #122. Unitas was picked at 102, Blanda at 119.

3) The whole point of the opposite argument is that you can win 1 or many SBs with outliers in late rounds. If Bradshaw counts 4 times for 1st rounders then Brady counts 7 times for outliers.


Also we arent picking in the Top 5, which is where almost all of the SB titles from 1st Rounders are coming from. So even the base argument is Cherry Picking when it fails to begin with pick #9.

That being said if we see a quality 1st Round QB and we take him sounds awesome to me... But there is 0 reason to take an average QB over a HoF OG if that is our option. Position should barely be factored in.

Failing to pick an elite talent is what wastes a 1st rnd pick not failing to pick a QB or a position of most need.

I think we’re in rough agreement yes, perhaps a few points of talking past, certainly not enough to matter.

I’m looking at across the board, not just the Saints.

We’re also looking at it in vacuum: does FA factor? Era of play etc. FA radically changed how teams are structured. Ballooning QB salaries. Probably a lot more too.

As for the bold part in your post?

I agree. A team is wise if they spend a 1st rounder, ie if the payer is BPA. Drafting for need often results in square pegs in round holes. Drafting BPA can often be the best play.

Only counter is QB does tend to break those rules because of the dearth of high end talent in the NFL. In other words demand has far outstripped supply at the most critical position. Thus resulting in over-drafting of QBs. Has been the case for years if not decades.

 

[SystemShock]

Doesn't matter if they have changed teams

Actually, it does matter, a lot, since we are talking about drafting a QB, and whether the Saints can afford to wait to draft a QB.

 

[Saintly Marine]

This would be my approach on this question. A new coach was just hired to retool/rebuild based upon his assumed ability to build a competitive team. Now you have a 32 yr old QB that has some ability to play the game. Question is #1. What is the time frame Coach KM has for his planned vision for the ultimate prize? #2. Does it view the QB situation as the very first piece necessary to put his plan in action? #3. Build around current QB for other pieces of his plan in year 1 or wait for Yr 2 to revaluate past performances.
Pure speculation at this point regardless unless we actually know what Coach M and staff honestly believe what they have on hand currently to work with. Unless they can get value with Dart, or the other high talented QB, Dont think they pull the trigger. saving capitol to acquire more pieces to build a foundation starts with collecting all the pieces needed. We could draft a Mahone type QB and that would serve no purpose with a foundation to protect the king and allow him to have targets to throw too. Honestly, I dont believe they Go QB right off the bat. Depends on {as usual} how the draft plays out. never plays out as everyone suspects.. just an opinion.

 

[Hedon James]

I also think that a sizable contingent of Saints fans are cognizant that our new HC has a reputation as a QB guru. That is further enhanced with the knowledge that we have 2 other former NFL QBs on staff in the form of Nussmeier and Tolzien. We seem to be geared for QB development. I'll agree with ALL of that. But a lot of us think that's a sign we're taking a QB, or wanting us to take a QB....to put all that QB coaching to good use.

That's where I'll diverge. I won't disagree, because that MIGHT be the case, but I don't see it as proof of that. Good QB coaching should be in place no matter what....maximize the talent already on the roster. Make marginal guys average; make average guys good; and make good guys great or "franchise". Doesn't matter if it's a 1st round talent, like Herbert; or a 4th round talent, like Prescott; or a 5th round talent like Rattler. It's simply SMART to gear your team for QB development. And it makes sense to be looking at QBs to develop, but it doesn't mean we'll discard the ones we've already got. We're gonna coach them ALL up and see what happens.

I think the worst mistake we could make would be to take a QB....ANY QB....under the assumption this staff WILL develop them. But if that's the assumption, why not Rattler? Why not Haener? And even though 9 other guys have tried and mostly failed, why not Carr? You still have to have the RIGHT QB, AND the coaching. One without the other is just continuation of the status quo. I also have hope that, with those 3 former NFL QBs on staff, perhaps they'll provide the scouting department the keys to identify the RIGHT QB. Fingers crossed!

 

[longtime lurker]

Just warm yourself up to the idea that we are taking a QB in the 1st. I’ve already prepared myself

Agreed, I don’t think KM decided to take this job without a plan for a franchise QB…historically we are never close enough to the top of the draft to make that pick…and we are close enough this year to swing it.

I’m good with it if for no other reason than I’ve never seen em do it in my 45 years of being a fan lol. Take a swing, all good.

As an aside, just thought about 2 of the top 5 ever not being first rounders. That’s pretty wild.
Brees was a second round pick and Brady I think was a 6th round choice?

It will be exciting come draft day. I’m expecting the Saints to come out of the 1st round with our future starting QB. Get your top shelf liquor ready.

 

[texasjefe]

Nico and Arnold are not franchise QBs. Klubnick, I’ll have to see more of.

1000%

It's been fascinating to watch the new Saints staff go all in researching QB's. Maybe it started early in January, but it sure seems like it ramped up in the past 3 weeks. It's being driven by the Giants' hardly being committed to Shedeur, and signing Russ and Jameis, but it could be a smokescreen. I think Daboll's an idiot for not wanting to draft Shedeur.

I think the Saints have three factors at play, beyond coach-QB's Moore, Tolzien, and Nussmeier...

(1) They're picking at #9 and they are just not going to expect to be picking Top 10 next year.

(2) The 2026 QB class feels quite less in talent than the 2025 class. Your boy Nussy better not be dropping all the games he did last year.

(3) They want to get their guy in the building now and develop him. Also make Rattler better at the same time with competition.

I think alot is trending in Sander's or Dart's direction.

 

[RadsRock]

I don't KNOW the answer, but my perception & belief is that for every 1st round QB selected; another 2-3 1st round QBs are either outright busts who no longer play football, or journeymen. If someone can show me my perception is wrong, I'll adjust my belief.

tldr: Yeah, it's a crapshoot, and tough to define success vs bust, but the historical bust rate isn't quite as bad as the 67-75% you projected.

From https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.foxsports.com/stories/nfl/nfl-draft-first-round-qb-hit-rate

In 20 years of NFL Drafts, from 2002 through 2023, a startling 39 of the 61 quarterbacks picked in the first round (63.9 percent) were more of a "miss" than a "hit." That included "misses" on more than half of the quarterbacks picked in the top 10 (21 of 37, 56.8 percent) — a startling rebuke of the supposed best of the best.


From

What History Reveals About a First-Round Quarterback’s Success Rate

When it comes to first-round quarterbacks, for every Patrick Mahomes, there’s a Ryan Leaf.

www.si.com

You can see the finer details of his research in the article (subscription required), but to summarize the rest of the findings, out of 45 first-round quarterbacks covered in the study, 20 percent fell into the “franchise” category, 17.8 percent in the Hall of Fame/Future Hall of Fame category, and 4.4 percent in the low-end starter category.


And one more From

Why drafting a successful NFL quarterback remains ‘an inexact science’

Despite NFL decision-makers' robust resumes as talent evaluators and extensive research, franchise quarterbacks remain the rarest of breeds

www.nytimes.com

In the modern era of the NFL Draft (since 1967), 130 quarterbacks have been selected in the first round. Only 61 of those (46.9 percent) have won a playoff game as a starter, according to NFL Research, and just 58 of those quarterbacks (44.6 percent) have garnered Pro Bowl honors. Just 13 (8.1 percent) won a Super Bowl as a starter, and two of those didn’t even win their Super Bowls for their original teams.

 

[RadsRock]

And here's another interesting bit... "hit" rated for first rounders at all positions. It seems QB is in the same range as all others - except centers.

So it's clear we need to take a center.

 

[SigFreudianSlip]

And here's another interesting bit... "hit" rated for first rounders at all positions. It seems QB is in the same range as all others - except centers.

So it's clear we need to take a center.

I’ve never seen that before. Thank you for sharing.

 

[Ghost]

And here's another interesting bit... "hit" rated for first rounders at all positions. It seems QB is in the same range as all others - except centers.

So it's clear we need to take a center.

In line with what I’ve seen, WRs are very much a gamble in the 1st.

 

[DSnfla]

Nico and Arnold are not franchise QBs. Klubnick, I’ll have to see more of.

They didn't think Burrow or Daniels were franchise QBs the yr before they came out either. Heck before this last season Ward was not even thought of as a 1st rd pick more less the #1 pick